Dataset Information

Nonthermal Pulsed Ultrasound Treatment for the Reduction in Abdominal Fat: A Pilot Study.

ABSTRACT: Objective: Noninvasive fat reduction has become increasingly popular. This study evaluated the outcomes of multiple treatments with a nonthermal focused ultrasound device for the noninvasive removal of excess abdominal fat. Design: Participants underwent a total of three pulsed, focused ultrasound treatments spaced two weeks apart. Setting: This study took place in an outpatient dermatology office in a suburb of a major city. Participants: Ten healthy female subjects between 18 and 60 years of age with an abdominal thickness of at least 0.6cm and body mass index between 22 and 30kg/m2 were included. Measurements: Fat layer thickness was measured by ultrasound imaging and skin caliper and was compared with baseline at the four-, eight-, and 12-week follow-up visits after the final treatment session. Results: The study subjects underwent a total of 30 treatment sessions. Ultrasound imaging of the targeted fat layer decreased significantly by 13, 16, and 13 percent at the four-, eight-, and 12-week follow-up time points, respectively, while measurements of the fat layer as performed by skin caliper decreased by 12, 10, and 13 percent, respectively. All subjects noted improvement, while investigators noted significant improvement and expressed high satisfaction from the ultrasound treatment outcomes at the final visit. Treatments were well tolerated and no adverse events were recorded during the study period. Conclusion: Nonthermal pulsed focused ultrasound appears to be a safe and effective treatment option for the noninvasive removal of unwanted abdominal fat deposits. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02700152.

SUBMITTER: Weinstein Velez M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6169596 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Nonthermal Pulsed Ultrasound Treatment for the Reduction in Abdominal Fat: A Pilot Study.

Weinstein Velez Mara M Ibrahim Omer O Petrell Kathleen K Dover Jeffrey S JS

The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology 20180901 9

Objective: Noninvasive fat reduction has become increasingly popular. This study evaluated the outcomes of multiple treatments with a nonthermal focused ultrasound device for the noninvasive removal of excess abdominal fat. Design: Participants underwent a total of three pulsed, focused ultrasound treatments spaced two weeks apart. Setting: This study took place in an outpatient dermatology office in a suburb of a major city. Participants: Ten healthy female subjects ...[more]

PMID: 30319729

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Pneumoperitoneum is a rare cause of abdominal pain characterized by a high mortality. Ultrasonography (US) can detect free intraperitoneal air; however, its accuracy remains unclear. The aims of this pilot study were to define the diagnostic performance and the reliability of abdominal US for the diagnosis of pneumoperitoneum. METHODS:This was a prospective observational study. Four senior and two junior physicians were shown, in an unpaired randomized order, abdominal US videos from 11 patients with and 11 patients without pneumoperitoneum. Abdominal US videos were obtained from consecutive patients presenting to ED complaining abdominal pain with the diagnosis of pneumoperitoneum established by CT. Abdominal US was performed according to a standardized protocol that included the following scans: epigastrium, right and left hypochondrium, umbilical area and right hypochondrium with the patient lying on the left flank. We evaluated accuracy, intra- and inter-observer agreement of abdominal US when reviewed by senior physicians. Furthermore, we compared the accuracy of a "2 scan-fast exam" (epigastrium and right hypochondrium) vs the full US examination and the accuracy of physicians expert in US vs nonexpert ones. Finally, accuracy of US was compared with abdominal radiography in patients with available images. RESULTS:Considering senior revision, accuracy of abdominal US was 88.6 % (95 % CI 79.4-92.4 %) with a sensitivity of 95.5 % (95 % CI 86.3-99.2 %) and a specificity of 81.8 % (95 % CI 72.6-85.5 %). Inter- and intra-observer agreement (k) were 0.64 and 0.95, respectively. Accuracy of a "2 scan-fast exam" (87.5 %, 95 % CI 77.9-92.4 %) was similar to global exam. Sensitivity of abdominal radiography (72.2 %, 95 % CI 54.8-85.7 %) was lower than that of abdominal US, while specificity (92.5 %, 95 % CI 79.5-98.3 %) was higher. Accuracy (68.2 %, 95 % CI 51.4-80.9 %) of junior reviewers evaluating US was lower than senior reviewers. CONCLUSIONS:Senior physicians can recognize US signs of pneumoperitoneum with a good accuracy and reliability; sensitivity of US could be superior to abdominal radiography and a 2 fast-scan exam seems as accurate as full abdominal examination. US could be a useful bedside screening test for pneumoperitoneum. Trial registry ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT02004925; URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Dataset Information

Nonthermal Pulsed Ultrasound Treatment for the Reduction in Abdominal Fat: A Pilot Study.

Publications

Nonthermal Pulsed Ultrasound Treatment for the Reduction in Abdominal Fat: A Pilot Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets